MiR-320a as a Potential Novel Circulating Biomarker of Arrhythmogenic CardioMyopathy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diagnosis of Arrhythmogenic CardioMyopathy (ACM) is challenging and often late after disease onset. No circulating biomarkers are available to date. Given their involvement in several cardiovascular diseases, plasma microRNAs warranted investigation as potential non-invasive diagnostic tools in ACM. We sought to identify circulating microRNAs differentially expressed in ACM with respect to Healthy Controls (HC) and Idiopathic Ventricular Tachycardia patients (IVT), often in differential diagnosis. ACM and HC subjects were screened for plasmatic expression of 377 microRNAs and validation was performed in 36 ACM, 53 HC, 21 IVT. Variable importance in data partition was estimated through Random Forest analysis and accuracy by Receiver Operating Curves. Plasmatic miR-320a showed 0.53 ± 0.04 fold expression difference in ACM vs. HC (p < 0.01). A similar trend was observed when comparing ACM (n = 13) and HC (n = 17) with athletic lifestyle, a ACM precipitating factor. Importantly, ACM patients miR-320a showed 0.78 ± 0.05 fold expression change vs. IVT (p = 0.03). When compared to non-invasive ACM diagnostic parameters, miR-320a ranked highly in discriminating ACM vs. IVT and it increased their accuracy. Finally, miR-320a expression did not correlate with ACM severity. Our data suggest that miR-320a may be considered a novel potential biomarker of ACM, specifically useful in ACM vs. IVT differentiation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it